On Oct 21, 7:10*pm, "Tim Roll-Pickering" T.C.Roll-
wrote:
Thanks again, 4x4-wielding suburbanites

Ah the myth that bendies are only hated by car drivers. When campaigning for
Boris in areas served by bendies I found this policy to be very popular
amongst people who have to use them.

I'm deeply sceptical, although it's possible that the people you spoke
to were idiots. In real life, bendies provide a much better service
than other buses on a given route.

and people who think that
'being funny on a game show' is a qualification for public office.

It's called democracy. If the people of London didn't want Boris as their
Mayor he wouldn't have been voted into office.

The people of London didn't want Boris as their mayor. The people of
various unsavoury outposts that the Tories gerrymandered into Greater
London in the first place to end Labour's dominance of the County of
London wanted Boris as their mayor; the people of actual London voted
for Ken.

And if all Boris had ever
done was "be funny on a game show" he would never have got anywhere, let
alone into Parliament then the nomination and finally the office.

You have a bizarrely misplaced faith in the processes governing the
acquisition of political office by the sons of extremely wealthy and
successful people.

--
John Band
john at johnband dot org
www.johnband.org

On 22 Oct, 00:08, John B wrote:
I'm deeply sceptical, although it's possible that the people you spoke
to were idiots. In real life, bendies provide a much better service
than other buses on a given route.

He did say they "weren't very popular". What he didn't say was whether
those same people thought replacing them with normal double deckers
would fix anything.

U

On Oct 22, 12:38*am, Mr Thant
wrote:
I'm deeply sceptical, although it's possible that the people you spoke
to were idiots. In real life, bendies provide a much better service
than other buses on a given route.

He did say they "weren't very popular". What he didn't say was whether
those same people thought replacing them with normal double deckers
would fix anything.

Fair point, although 'popular' only has any relevance at all when
compared to plausible alternatives (so if bendies weren't very popular
compared to, say, gold-plated Rolls-Royces, or double deckers that
weren't rammed so full you'd need to wait for three to pass before you
could get on one, then that's entirely irrelevant).

I lived in Finsbury Park when the 29 got bendified. It went from being
a route where you'd have two or more double deckers go past you in the
morning too full to stop, to a bus which - although always well-
loaded, and relatively rarely endowed with many seats - you could
still always get on. Compared to that fact, none of the other criteria
matter in the slightest.

--
John Band
john at johnband dot org
www.johnband.org

On 22 Oct, 00:47, John B wrote:
Fair point, although 'popular' only has any relevance at all when
compared to plausible alternatives

Well the comparison point is the non-bendy routes that people use,
which generally are more pleasant. The mistake is to think that the
bendy routes would suddenly be more pleasant if only they were
converted to double decker, which as you say, is not the case.

U

John B wrote:

Fair point, although 'popular' only has any relevance at all when
compared to plausible alternatives (so if bendies weren't very popular
compared to, say, gold-plated Rolls-Royces, or double deckers that
weren't rammed so full you'd need to wait for three to pass before you
could get on one, then that's entirely irrelevant).

I've often been left standing at bus stops day and night because the bendies
are so packed they don't stop. Maybe the 29 is different but the 25 has been
a much worse travelling experience since becoming a bendy.

On Oct 22, 12:08 am, John B wrote:
The people of London didn't want Boris as their mayor. The people of
various unsavoury outposts that the Tories gerrymandered into Greater
London in the first place to end Labour's dominance of the County of
London wanted Boris as their mayor; the people of actual London voted
for Ken.

Speak for yourself. I live in a london borough and I voted for Boris.
I want someone who represents me - a white middle class male - not
some borderline corrupt closet commie who's only interested in right-
on minority causes.

B2003

On Oct 22, 12:07*pm, Boltar wrote:
The people of London didn't want Boris as their mayor. The people of
various unsavoury outposts that the Tories gerrymandered into Greater
London in the first place to end Labour's dominance of the County of
London wanted Boris as their mayor; the people of actual London voted
for Ken.

Speak for yourself. I live in a london borough and I voted for Boris.
I want someone who represents me - a white middle class male - not
some borderline corrupt closet commie who's only interested in right-
on minority causes.

But (assuming you mean an Inner London, ex-county-of-London borough)
you're in a minority - Ken won the majority of votes in Inner London
and lost because of the strong Tory contingent in places like Bromley.

Did you somehow fail to notice that - like the vast majority of
politicians - Ken is, err, a white middle-class male? And I wouldn't
personally class the massive focus on transport improvement that was
the primary characteristic Ken's time in power (both in the 1980s and
the 2000s) as a right-on minority cause.

--
John Band
john at johnband dot org
www.johnband.org

On Oct 22, 12:26 pm, John B wrote:
But (assuming you mean an Inner London, ex-county-of-London borough)
you're in a minority - Ken won the majority of votes in Inner London
and lost because of the strong Tory contingent in places like Bromley.

London is where its currently defined municiple borders end , not at a
convenient point for left wingers. If you want just the historical
london then you should go back to roman times which would give you
the City itself, ironically a truer blue tory area you'll not be
likely to find anywhere in the country.

Did you somehow fail to notice that - like the vast majority of
politicians - Ken is, err, a white middle-class male? And I wouldn't

He may well be , but he's of the standard self hating liberal type you
find dotted all around the left wing pseudo intellectual arena.

personally class the massive focus on transport improvement that was
the primary characteristic Ken's time in power (both in the 1980s and
the 2000s) as a right-on minority cause.

Can't say I noticed. The tube was just as crap as ever and even more
expensive when I thankfully could give up using it to commute earlier
this year.

B2003

Boltar wrote:

London is where its currently defined municiple borders end , not at a
convenient point for left wingers. If you want just the historical
london then you should go back to roman times which would give you
the City itself, ironically a truer blue tory area you'll not be
likely to find anywhere in the country.

I may be mistaken but I think the actual residential voters in the City have
gone Labour several times. (Although didn't Boris carry the City this time?)
There are only about 7000 voters, from recollection mainly key workers and
nursing students. Very little of the City's "truer blue" tendency is
residential. I'm reminded of the 1940 US Presidential election which was
billed as "Roosevelt vs. Wall Street." Roosevelt carried the Wall Street
precinct by 3:1. (Literally, the voters were a businessman, an engineer, a
caretaker and his wife.)

On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 04:08:16PM -0700, John B wrote:

I'm deeply sceptical, although it's possible that the people you spoke
to were idiots. In real life, bendies provide a much better service
than other buses on a given route.

That is, I'm afraid, not true.

Route 38 had a better service before it went all bendy. By which I mean
there were more seats (which were more comfortable) and a more frequent
service, with journey times being about the same. There was also less
fare-dodging.

The people of London didn't want Boris as their mayor. The people of
various unsavoury outposts that the Tories gerrymandered into Greater
London in the first place to end Labour's dominance of the County of
London wanted Boris as their mayor; the people of actual London voted
for Ken.

If what you say was true, then Livingstone wouldn't have got in in the
first place. Nor would Labour have won the GLC elections in 1964, 1973,
and 1981.

He lost because he stood as a Labour party candidate at a time when
Labour are deeply unpopular. If he'd stayed as an independent right
from the start, he would, I am sure, have done better, maybe even well
enough to win.

--
David Cantrell | Minister for Arbitrary Justice